Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35148309›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Limited reciprocal surrogacy of bird and habitat diversity and inconsistencies in their representation in Romanian protected areas.

Julia C Geue, Paula J Rotter, Caspar Gross, Zoltán Benkő, István Kovács, Ciprian Fântână, Judit Veres-Szászka, Cristi Domșa, Emanuel Baltag, Szilárd J Daróczi and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Julia C GeueComparative Zoology, Institute for Evolution and Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1038-8614
Paula J RotterComparative Zoology, Institute for Evolution and Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Caspar GrossInstitute of Medical Genetics and Applied Genomics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9009-5458
Zoltán BenkőRomanian Ornithological Society / BirdLife Romania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
István KovácsMilvus Group, Bird and Nature Protection Association, Târgu Mureș, Romania.
Ciprian FântânăRomanian Ornithological Society / BirdLife Romania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Judit Veres-SzászkaRomanian Ornithological Society / BirdLife Romania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Cristi DomșaRomanian Ornithological Society / BirdLife Romania, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Emanuel BaltagMilvus Group, Bird and Nature Protection Association, Târgu Mureș, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-3107-0349
Szilárd J DarócziMilvus Group, Bird and Nature Protection Association, Târgu Mureș, Romania.
Gábor M BónéMilvus Group, Bird and Nature Protection Association, Târgu Mureș, Romania.
Viorel D PopescuDepartment of Biological Sciences and Sustainability Studies Theme, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, United States of America.
Henri A ThomassenComparative Zoology, Institute for Evolution and Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Societatea Ornitologică Română · ROUniversity of Tübingen · DEAlexandru Ioan Cuza University · ROUniversity of Bucharest · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because it is impossible to comprehensively characterize biodiversity at all levels of organization, conservation prioritization efforts need to rely on surrogates. As species distribution maps of relished groups as well as high-resolution remotely sensed data increasingly become available, both types of surrogates are commonly used. A good surrogate should represent as much of biodiversity as possible, but it often remains unclear to what extent this is the case. Here, we aimed to address this question by assessing how well bird species and habitat diversity represent one another. We conducted our study in Romania, a species-rich country with high landscape heterogeneity where bird species distribution data have only recently started to become available. First, we prioritized areas for conservation based on either 137 breeding bird species or 36 habitat classes, and then evaluated their reciprocal surrogacy performance. Second, we examined how well these features are represented in already existing protected areas. Finally, we identified target regions of high conservation value for the potential expansion of the current network of reserves (as planned under the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030). We found a limited reciprocal surrogacy performance, with bird species performing slightly better as a conservation surrogate for habitat diversity than vice versa. We could also show that areas with a high conservation value based on habitat diversity were represented better in already existing protected areas than areas based on bird species, which varied considerably between species. Our results highlight that taxonomic and environmental (i.e., habitat types) data may perform rather poorly as reciprocal surrogates, and multiple sources of data are required for a full evaluation of protected areas expansion.

Indexed as

EcosystemAnimalsBiodiversityBirdsConservation of Natural ResourcesRomania

Identifiers

PMID35148309
PMCPMC8836316
OpenAlexW4226158865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.